This Week, the Constitutional Court Becomes a 'Complete Body'... Likely to Begin Full Deliberation on the 'Geomsu Wanbak' Jurisdiction Dispute

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] On the 2nd, the Constitutional Court will become a 'complete body' as Chief Justice Yoo Nam-seok and Justice Lee Jong-seok return to work after their business trip to Turkey. Accordingly, attention is focused on the full-scale main hearing of the constitutional complaint filed by the People Power Party regarding the 'complete removal of prosecution investigation rights (Geomsu Wanbak) bill.'

Earlier, on the 27th of last month, the People Power Party filed a provisional injunction to prohibit the submission of the 'Geomsu Wanbak' bill to the plenary session against National Assembly Speaker Park Byeong-seok and Legislation and Judiciary Committee Chairman Park Gwang-on, and two days later, they filed the main case, a constitutional complaint.

Unlike constitutional petitions, constitutional complaints are heard directly by the full bench (9 justices) without going through a designated panel (3 justices). During the period when Chief Justice Yoo and Justice Lee were on their business trip, the Constitutional Court reportedly moved quickly by notifying the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutor General, who are interested parties, of the receipt of the case and requesting an opinion from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office. On the 28th of last month, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office sent an opinion to the Constitutional Court stating that there were procedural defects in the process of handling the 'Geomsu Wanbak' bill and that the content was unconstitutional.

The constitutional complaint hearing is subject to the general procedural rules for adjudication. Oral arguments are also held separately according to the Constitutional Court Act. However, if the complaint itself is inappropriate or defective, it can be dismissed without oral arguments.

Typically, decisions on unconstitutionality, impeachment, or party dissolution require the approval of six or more justices according to the Constitution, but for constitutional complaints, a decision to accept, reject, or dismiss can be made with the approval of a majority of the justices involved.

Precedents where constitutional complaints filed by lawmakers claiming infringement of deliberation and voting rights against the National Assembly Speaker were accepted include the 1997 case related to the 'rush' legislation incidents such as labor laws, and the 2011 case filed by former Democratic Labor Party leader Lee Jeong-hee, who claimed that opposing debates were ignored during the deliberation of the Korea Policy Finance Corporation Act and others.

Even if procedural defects in the legislative process are recognized as a result of the complaint, the problematic law does not immediately disappear. In the 1997 and 2011 precedents, the Constitutional Court acknowledged the infringement of deliberation and voting rights but dismissed requests for unconstitutionality confirmation regarding the legal effect or invalidity confirmation of the bill's passage.

In its 2011 decision, the Constitutional Court also stated, "If the proclamation of passage were invalidated solely on the grounds that (some lawmakers' rights were infringed), it would threaten the stability of the national legal order. Therefore, unless it is a clear violation of constitutional provisions regarding the legislative process, the proclamation of passage should not be immediately considered invalid."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.